Register here

Author Topic: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)  (Read 16249 times)

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1145
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #90 on: June 07, 2017, 05:30:31 am »
The GMD Combatant Commander is General Robinson and she has testified she is confident the deployed units are able to intercept anything launched out of North Korea.  As far as kill vehicles go, this latest test was a final check of the most recent version of the original kill vehicle developed by Raytheon and 8 units will be deployed by the end of the year.  Each version of the kill vehicle underwent its own series of validating tests.  A totally new design built by a consortium of Boeing/Lockheed/Raytheon is already in development for deployment starting around 2022 and will replace most of the older units.  This may be the last unitary kill vehicle as the MOKV phases in only a little later unless something like KEI gets resurrected pending the missile defense review that started on May 5th.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2005
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #91 on: June 07, 2017, 07:07:21 pm »
As far as kill vehicles go, this latest test was a final check of the most recent version of the original kill vehicle developed by Raytheon and 8 units will be deployed by the end of the year. 

Nine CE-II Block 1 EKVs according to VADM Syring's testimony today.

https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/FY18_WrittenStatement_HASC_SFS.PDF

Offline Airplane

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 381
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #92 on: June 08, 2017, 05:51:59 pm »
Wasn't Japan asking for a land based Aegis basing?
"The test of success is not what you do when your on top. Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.”
– General George S. Patton

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8284
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #93 on: August 31, 2017, 06:16:56 am »
From Inside Defense:

Missile Defense Agency researching possibility of 'common boost vehicle' for interceptors

The Missile Defense Agency is exploring the possibility of developing a "next-generation" common boost vehicle for Ground-based Interceptors defending the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10563
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #94 on: August 31, 2017, 06:35:41 am »
From Inside Defense:

Missile Defense Agency researching possibility of 'common boost vehicle' for interceptors

The Missile Defense Agency is exploring the possibility of developing a "next-generation" common boost vehicle for Ground-based Interceptors defending the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles.

That's what KEI was suppose to transition to. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8284
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #95 on: August 31, 2017, 06:42:03 am »
From Inside Defense:

Missile Defense Agency researching possibility of 'common boost vehicle' for interceptors

The Missile Defense Agency is exploring the possibility of developing a "next-generation" common boost vehicle for Ground-based Interceptors defending the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles.

That's what KEI was suppose to transition to.
AND make a nice intermediate range prompt strike missile IIRC.
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10563
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #96 on: August 31, 2017, 07:00:24 am »
From Inside Defense:

Missile Defense Agency researching possibility of 'common boost vehicle' for interceptors

The Missile Defense Agency is exploring the possibility of developing a "next-generation" common boost vehicle for Ground-based Interceptors defending the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles.

That's what KEI was suppose to transition to.
AND make a nice intermediate range prompt strike missile IIRC.

Yep.  We'd have our own Shaurya but better.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2005
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #97 on: June 18, 2018, 08:59:09 pm »

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2005
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #98 on: July 17, 2018, 09:49:29 pm »
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2018/07/16/putting-interceptors-on-trucks-is-the-fastest-way-trump-can-bolster-missile-defense-of-america/#58d99f347491

LT anticipating the rollout of the Missile Defense Review?

Always thought the GMD-E derived from KEI would have lent itself more readily to mobile basing modes.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8284
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #99 on: July 18, 2018, 06:25:13 am »
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-07/upgrade-national-missile-defense

Quote
Policymakers in some countries promote the idea of limited nuclear strikes to force favorable outcomes in a conventional war. Other regimes want nuclear weapons and delivery systems to gain advantage, deter great powers, or simply survive. U.S. policymakers know that the United States fields porous and arguably unreliable antiballistic-missile (ABM) systems and are fettered by this diplomatically and militarily. Such systems are unworthy of the country’s economic, military, and political power, and they threaten stability by permitting weaker powers to bluff and intimidate.

While the threat of retaliation—mutually assured destruction—deters most rational actors from contemplating a massive first strike against the United States, irrational actors—including otherwise rational actors who find themselves cornered—may not be deterred. Further, brinksmanship or a failed bluff might lead to small-scale initial strikes, and the lack of reliable defenses could encourage foolhardy enemy decisions.

There are countless potential scenarios that might result in a limited nuclear ballistic-missile strike against the United States. Should deterrence fail and an adversary initiate a limited launch, current national missile defense (NMD) architecture is insufficient to assure interception. This fact makes U.S. foreign policy self-restricted. Therefore, the United States must accelerate upgrading its NMD.
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot